Interesting italyprof. This is ultimately your call, but from my perspective, Mathews is fully legal by the rules.  Your initial thread said "max 25 HR".  It did not say "max 25 HR/162."  This is important, because you cannot search for HR/162 (I am pretty sure) in the draft center, so the only reasonable interpretation (and assumedly intent) of the rules is actual HR, not HR/162.  Again, ultimately your call, but I would have been fine with you using Mathews, and I would have assumed he would have been allowed, had I been using 1952.  Similarly, I would have assumed any player in my chosen season - 1956 - with 25 or fewer actual HR would have been allowed.

The interpretation doesn't affect me, because all of my players are under the limit regardless of whether it is HR or HR/162, but I would expect there may be additional teams (1972 in particular, because of the strike) that may end up with an illegal player if the rule is interpreted that way.

Yes, contrarian's interpretation seems reasonable. I respect that you've tried to stay within the letter of the law, but I would have no issue with your original team's construction.

I do, however, want to be sure I'm interpreting another rule correctly: The rule of "batting average under .300" (as stated in this forum) is subtly different from "No players with AVG over .299" (as stated in the league rules description). I have a couple of players right at .299, but didn't check whether they rounded down or up to that -- just want to be sure "under .3000000" is the intended cut off, not .2990000.

I am switching from 1971 to 1953. There is not enough quality depth from which to create a P staff.

Professor, I feel you were up front in this scenario and  I for one would not have a problem with Mathews sometimes those minor adjustments can either hinder or support your team which as we all can attest are trying to built a team that can be competitive in this scenario. I have no track record of builting a decent team sometimes I get lucky and can be presentable but unfortunately I am way behind the learning curve with the outstanding owners in this league so far. I checked the the baseball sites of Baseball-Reference,Baseball Almanac and Sim league draft center and they all have Eddie Mathews at 25 homerun in 1952, I have no clue how 26 popped up? Besides you are a terrific owner Professor and I know you play by the rules in all teams you have assembled, thank for your honesty and integrity you cannot deny that.  

Seems pretty clear you to me you can use the '52 Mathews and I encourage you to do so. He hit 25 homers that year, pure and simple. It's showing that in the draft center, on baseball-reference.com, and on the back of his baseball cards. To have it show as 26 based on some WIS calculation (probably for the reason you identified above) makes no difference to me.

RWHAY, no problem. 

Ok, I will put the team back as was originally: with Matthews, Senerchia and Lockman, given that several of the best owners on the site have all weighed in here. 

Thanks guys, one more quick trip to the DC to restore the original roster. Meanwhile we are still awaiting just two more owners to complete the  league. 

Put me down for 1975. I will get city and team name after I build the team...

I am switching from 1950 to 1970...still Fort Myers 

I am switching from 1950 to 1970...still Fort Myers 

Since two owners posted teams for seasons that they did not reserve first here (it is one season to a customer), I have asked them to remove the teams but also to reserve available seasons instead here. 

I reiterate the request to all owners who want to join the league to reserve a season here first, there are plenty of other years still available to build good and interesting teams with. 

BUT, seeing as how there is some interest beyond 20, IF both owners, or at least one and other owners ask for seasons so as to take us beyond 20, I am asking if anyone objects strongly to us going to 24 teams with a standard 4/4/4 format instead and a wildcard berth? 

This would mean more playoff opportunities and chances for all of course and if we are already at 21 if the two owners having made an honest mistake post different teams after reserving new seasons here, then we are likely to fill in a day or so anyway. 

Any strong objections? I am not sure either that the owners in question will want other seasons nor that everyone will be willing to go with such a change. So let's here opinions here (though this is not a formal vote, just a meeting of minds, a sense of the meeting, an expression of Rousseau's "General Will" (required reading for this course "The Social Contract" by Jean-Jacques Rousseau !). 

I also want to remind all of the owners already in the league AND any interested in this one but perhaps too late to reserve seasons here, that contrarian23's great "OL Like it Oughta Be" league  - MLB112440 - has room left and is arguably the most important idea for a theme league in a long time as it might change the way OLs are done if it catches on. 

So sign up for that either in addition to or if left out (sorry if it happens) of this league. 

If you guys are going to 24 I'll take a team.  Year TBD.  Can I substitute Emile for The Social Contract to satisfy the Rousseau reading requirement?

I assume we will cover the relationship between Rousseau and Voltaire?  In which case I hope Candide is on the reading list...kind of what Monty Python or Saturday Night Live would have been like had they existed in 18th c. France.

Or at least how Monty Python would be in dealing with French philosophers - like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crIJvcWkVcs


Or in a more general way, connecting sports to philosophers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6nI1v7mwwA

Hello italyprof --- awesome idea as is contrarian's (which I am also entering).  If you go to 24, I'd like to jump in with 1967 and the New Orleans Golden Knights.